| Literature DB >> 32938452 |
Faezeh Abbasi1, Reza Khajouei2,3, Moghaddameh Mirzaee4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite the prevalent use and advantages of information systems in hospitals, some have failed to meet their predefined objectives. Surgery information system (SIS) is a sub-system of a hospital information system. Its effective and efficient operation could enhance patient care in the busy environment of operating rooms with multiple tasks. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of SIS in three educational hospitals.Entities:
Keywords: Effectiveness; Efficiency; Evaluation; Surgery information system
Year: 2020 PMID: 32938452 PMCID: PMC7493378 DOI: 10.1186/s12911-020-01236-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak ISSN: 1472-6947 Impact factor: 2.796
Participants’ demographic information
| Demographic information | N (%) |
|---|---|
| Gender | |
| Female | 70 (85.4) |
| Male | 12 (14.6) |
| Work experience (year) | |
| ≥ 5 | 25 (31.6) |
| 6–15 | 31 (39.2) |
| > 15 | 23 (29.1) |
| Education | |
| Non-academic | 6 (7.4) |
| Academic | 75 (92.6) |
| Work experience with computer (year) | |
| ≥ 5 | 20 (33.3) |
| 6–15 | 37 (61.7) |
| > 15 | 3 (5.0) |
| Computer skills (year) | |
| Elementary | 24 (30.0) |
| Advanced | 56 (70.0) |
| Experience of using surgery information system | |
| ≥ 5 | 35 (60.3) |
| 6–15 | 23 (39.7) |
| Daily use of surgery information system | |
| < 1 | 45 (57.7) |
| ≥ 1 | 33 (42.3) |
| Experience of using traditional systems | |
| Yes | 62 (80.5) |
| No | 15 (19.5) |
Comparison of the mean efficiency and effectiveness of surgery information systems between the vendors
| Vendor | Factor | Mean ± Std | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tirazheh | Efficiency | 11.5 ± 1.4 | 0.3 |
| Peyvand Dadeh | 11.05 ± 2.8 | ||
| Tirazheh | Effectiveness | 35.4 ± 8.9 | 0.9 |
| Peyvand Dadeh | 34.8 ± 8.6 |
The rating of efficiency and effectiveness of the systems based on demographic information of the participants
| Demographic information | Variables | Effectiveness | Efficiency | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Acceptable N(%) | Marginal N (%) | Not acceptable N(%) | Acceptable N(%) | Marginal N(%) | Not acceptable N(%) | ||
| female | 32 (45.7) | 31 (44.3) | 7 (10) | 41 (58.6) | 19 (27.1) | 10 (14.3) | |
| male | 5 (41.7) | 5 (41.7) | 2 (16.7) | 9 (75.0) | 1 (8.3) | 2 (16.7) | |
| ≥5 | 12 (48) | 10 (40) | 3 (12) | 15 (60) | 7 (28) | 3 (12) | |
| 6–15 | 16 (51.6) | 12 (38.7) | 3 (9.7) | 19 (61.3) | 7 (22.6) | 5 (16) | |
| 16< | 8 (34.8) | 12 (52.2) | 3 (13) | 14 (60.9) | 5 (21.7) | 4 (17.4) | |
| Academic | 3 (50) | 3 (50) | 0 (0) | 5 (83.3) | 0 (0) | 1 (16.7) | |
| Non-academic | 34 (45.3) | 32 (42.7) | 9 (12) | 44 (58.7) | 20 (26.7) | 11 (14.7) | |
| ≥5 | 10 (50) | 7 (35) | 3 (15) | 14 (70) | 2 (10) | 4 (20) | |
| 6–15 | 17 (45.9) | 17 (45.9) | 3 (8.1) | 21 (56.8) | 11 (29.7) | 5 (13.5) | |
| 16< | 1 (33.3) | 2 (66.7) | 0 (0) | 2 (66.7) | 1 (33.3) | 0 (0) | |
| elementary | 6 (25) | 14 (58.3) | 4 (16.7) | 12 (50) | 8 (33.3) | 4 (16.7) | |
| advanced | 29 (51.8) | 22 (39.3) | 5 (8.9) | 36 (64.3) | 12 (21.4) | 8 (14.3) | |
| ≥5 | 19 (54.3) | 12 (34.3) | 4 (11.4) | 25 (71.4) | 5 (14.3) | 5 (14.3) | |
| 6–15 | 12 (52.2) | 10 (43.5) | 1 (4.3) | 14 (60.9) | 7 (30.4) | 2 (8.7) | |
| < 1 | 21 (46.7) | 20 (44.4) | 4 (8.9) | 31 (68.9) | 9 (20.0) | 5 (11.1) | |
| 1≤ | 16 (48.5) | 14 (42.4) | 3 (9.1) | 18 (54.5) | 10 (30.3) | 5 (15.2) | |
| Yes | 31 (50) | 26 (41.9) | 5 (8.1) | 38 (61.3) | 17 (27.4) | 7 (11.3) | |
| No | 4 (26.7) | 9 (60) | 2 (13.3) | 9 (60) | 3 (20) | 3 (20) | |
The viewpoints of the participants concerning the efficiency and effectiveness of surgery information system
| Factors related to the efficiency and effectiveness of the system | Low | Medium | High |
|---|---|---|---|
| More effective than the traditional system | 17 (20.7) | 18 (22.0) | 47 (57.3) |
| No need to learn the system | 37 (45.1) | 21 (25.6) | 24 (29.3) |
| Meeting the users’ needs | 20 (24.4) | 32 (39.0) | 30 (36.6) |
| System ease of use | 25 (30.5) | 28 (34.1) | 29 (35.4) |
| Reducing physicians’ error | 18 (22.0) | 22 (26.8) | 39 (47.6) |
| Improving the safety of patients in operating room | 27 (32.9) | 28 (34.1) | 27 (32.9) |
| Increasing patients’ satisfaction | 27 (32.9) | 30 (36.6) | 24 (29.3) |
| Increasing the quality of the documents | 14 (17.1) | 21 (25.6) | 46 (56.1) |
| Increasing the confidentiality of information | 15 (18.3) | 20 (24.4) | 46 (56.1) |
| Easy documentation of reports | 18 (22.0) | 25 (30.5) | 39 (47.6) |
| Increasing the reliability of information and data in patient records | 13 (15.9) | 27 (32.9) | 42 (51.2) |
| Continuing patients care | 16 (19.5) | 30 (36.6) | 36 (43.9) |
| Increasing the quality of care provided to patients | 23 (28.0) | 25 (30.5) | 34 (41.5) |
| Increasing the accuracy of recording patients information | 18 (22.0) | 22 (26.8) | 42 (51.2) |
| Facilitating communication among specialists | 18 (22.0) | 31 (37.8) | 33 (40.2) |
| Facilitating communication among clinical wards s | 12 (14.6) | 24 (29.3) | 45 (54.9) |
| Learning of the system in a short period of time | 19 (23.2) | 37 (45.1) | 25 (30.5) |
| Facilitating reporting | 16 (19.5) | 19 (23.2) | 46 (56.1) |
| Saving time | 22 (26.8) | 18 (22.0) | 42 (51.2) |
| Increasing the completion of documents | 19 (23.2) | 20 (24.4) | 42 (51.2) |
| Reducing the duration of requests from other wards | 16 (19.5) | 23 (28.0) | 42 (51.2) |
The relationship between the efficiency and effectiveness of surgery information system
| Effectiveness | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Acceptable N(%) | Marginal N(%) | Not Acceptable N(%) | ||
Acceptable N(%) | 36 (43.9) | 14 (17.0) | 0 (0) | |
Marginal N(%) | 1 (1.2) | 18 (21.9) | 1 (1.2) | |
| Not Acceptable N(% | 0 (0) | 4 (4.8) | 8 (9.7) | |